ReviewGastroenterology report2017
Intestinal autotransplantation.
Review in Gastroenterology report, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Advancements and trends in digestive system autotransplantation: a bibliometric and visualization analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Management Strategies and Outcomes for Small Intestinal Neuroendocrine Tumours with Involvement of the Superior Mesenteric Vessels: A Systematic Review.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2023Pooled it
- Ex-vivo small bowel auto-transplantation with a prior pancreaticoduodenectomy (Whipple's procedure): a report of a rare case and review of literature.BMC surgery · 2026Review
- Clinicopathologic features of allied disorders of Hirschsprung disease and status update.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2025Review
- Vascular reconstruction of segmental intestinal grafts using autologous internal iliac vessels.Gastroenterology report · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Most abdominal neoplasms involving the root of the superior mesenteric artery and/or celiac artery are difficult to manage with conventional operative techniques because of limited intestinal ischemia times and poor accessibility to the tumor region.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.